Over the last decade, there has been considerable debate concerning the processes governing the comprehension of indeterminate sentences such as (A) Lisa began the book, and how they come to be understood as something like (B) Lisa began reading the book. A major theme in this debate concerns the role of context in facilitating comprehension. Research shows that the costs associated with processing indeterminate expressions (e.g., McElree et al., 2001) are attenuated when these sentences are preceded by a sufficiently supporting context (de Almeida, 2004). A plausible explanation for this observation is that context facilitates comprehension by activating knowledge in support of inferential processes. This view lies in contrast to the coercion hypothesis, for which indeterminate sentences are enriched by default as a function of retrieving internal properties of the nominal book (Pustejovsky, 1995). In the present study, we employed a discourse-based sentence recognition paradigm (Sachs, 1967), investigating whether a strongly biasing context facilitates comprehension of indeterminate sentences. Our goal was to determine whether the interpretation of indeterminate sentences is facilitated by context manipulations that tap into inferential processes rather than constituent features of the complement noun. We found that participants (N = 72) drew systematic inferences from the context to the extent that they recognized sentences such as (B) from the discourse, when in fact, they were only exposed to indeterminate sentences such as (A). These results were obtained when proposed elements of the coercion hypothesis were experimentally and statistically controlled, suggesting that context facilitates comprehension of indeterminate sentences by triggering pragmatic inferences.